Replies

"The study also pinpointed, for the first time, this type of processed food as the main source of added sugar in the U.S. diet. "

This makes zero sense in the context of telling people not to worry about it:

And this is why I tell people to log and look at sugar.

Also no one said this:

Moreover, it is NOT TRUE that sugar is in everything. It is trivially easy to buy foods that don't have added sugar.

I clearly stated that it is not in dispute that plenty of foods that you would not expect have added sugar or an excess of sugar beyond what its reasonable. I did not state sugar is in everything.

You are making a lot of assumptions here:

My concern, as noted, is that mostly what people who feel a lack of control over "sugar" are talking about dessert-type items, and turning it into "you must give up sriracha"

Sriracha having 10% of your daily added sugar allowance is absurd. You are looking at grams where I am looking at grams in context of your daily allowance. I am not suggesting 0 sugars, I am saying that it is incredibly easy to rack up 25 grams of added sugar without even thinking about it, especially if you enjoy convenience foods which is why you should track all of it. Again, it all adds up.

So you are using the word "calorie" wrong. A calorie is a unit of measurement, it does not have macros. You seem to be using it as an analogy for "food." So to restate, you are claiming that sugar (technically, carbs) acts differently in the body than fat or protein -- that's true (and fat and protein act differently from each other), but it has nothing to do with making you "fatter" and nothing to do with it being added or not. Importantly, sugar does not lead to an increase in net fat in a calorie deficit (see my prior response on this point, as fat is more easily stored as fat). And sugar does not cause leptin resistance, apparently excess body fat can (and so does weight loss often), based on your own links. If you want to debate these points, please post in debate, as I'd like to keep this one about the experience of various sugar limitation goals and any observations or struggles or positives.

I mean calories derived from a specific macro and you know exactly what I'm talking about. One gram of fat contains 9 calories while one gram of sugar contains 4. And you yourself citied the difference between natural sugars processing slower because they are with fiber vs added sugars so not sure why you are backtracking. Further, I have quoted scientific studies to make my assertions and you have quoted a blog. You're wrong.

Regardless, it's careless to suggest to people that oh that sriracha or that dressing, don't worry about it. It would be tantamount to suggesting that people shouldn't worry about tracking 10 to 20 percent of their calories because 3 to 6 grams of added sugar is 10 to 20% of what your maximum daily added sugar intake should be.

Although I am tracking everything at the moment just for the experiment, this is the conclusion I came to too. For me, non dessert added sugar tends to be pretty small amounts in savory foods or, most commonly, some sauces or rubs, and I really see no reason to care about that. Plus, it would be hard for that to add up to all that many cals. I really think these no sugar challenges that start by assuming you are eating some huge amount of sugar and then tell you to avoid these incidental sources are rather silly. I think it makes more sense to have people track their sugar, understand where it is coming from, and then consider reasonable changes if it is, in fact, higher than expected, which for most will be reducing snack/dessert foods or sugar-added drinks, with some maybe having more than expected in sugary cereals or trail mixes or granola bars or flavored yogurt. But if someone really loves adding, say, a bit of sugar to coffee or oats, I don't think that's something to be bothered about if the overall nutrition of the day and percentage of added sugar is fine anyway.

I used to use an example of a rhubarb sauce with a little sugar added vs. a homemade apple sauce. Why is the latter inherently preferable to the former? No good reason IMO. (Even Dr. Greger, who has other issues, no doubt, says that objecting to a little sugar or oil if that is how the overall diet becomes more sustainable and is able to incorporate nutritious foods like oats and veg, is not something to worry about.)

One of the points of these challenges is educating yourself about how much sugar, especially hidden added sugar, are in your foods. Including savory and sauces.

You don't care about sugar in sauces? You should. For example, one tablespoon of ketchup contains a full teaspoon of sugar (4 grams). A full 1/3rd of the ketchup you eat is sugar. BBQ sauce like Sweet Baby Rays? Two tablespoons of that sauce contains 4 teaspoons (16 grams) of sugar. So 2/3rds of your BBQ sauce is sugar. What about something savory like a Lean Cuisine? The Chicken Ranch Club contains just over 2 teaspoons of sugar (9 grams). Salad dressings average around a 1 1/2 tsp (6 grams) per tablespoon serving. It all starts adding up in a big way, especially when you should be averaging about 25 grams total per day.

The more important issue is why calories derived from sugar are worse for you than calories from fats or protein. Sugars almost convert straight to fat and worse yet, calories from sugar keep you hungry. There is a hormone called leptin that increases as you take in calories. As leptin increases it tells your brain that hey, we're full. We've got enough food/energy right now and we should work on storing and using it. If your brain is not getting a signal from leptin it thinks it's hungry. When you take in sugar it raises your insulin levels and insulin blocks the signal from leptin getting to the brain. Sugar, from natural sources, is usually paired with natural fiber which is why fruits are ok, it's considered a slow carb. The fiber in the fruit slows down how quickly the sugar is metabolized into fat.

Calories in/calories out is only half true, where you get your calories is equally as large an issue.

As noted upthread, the bigger food manufacturers were required to include "added sugar" to their labels beginning Jan 2020, and many of them had already started when I did this challenge last fall. Once exception was Newman's Ranch salad dressing, which has 1 g total sugar per 30 g of dressing. Since I usually eat 15 g salad dressing per salad (I supply the rest of the "mouth feel" with cottage cheese, which has 6 g of intrinsic sugar per 113 g (more than I add to a salad), of which 0 comes from added sugar), while I logged the half gram of sugar, it was not something I was concerned about.

Temperatures in Boston and throughout New England “smashed” records this weekend, according to the National Weather Service.

Highs in the city were recorded at 70 degrees on Saturday and Sunday, marking the first time Boston has seen back-to-back 70 degree days in January since records began in 1872, and only the third and fourth time temperatures have been so high overall.

This is a good point. A lot of these fear-mongering tactics about condiments assume that you use the same condiments every day and that you use silly amounts of them. We've been talking about 1 TBSP of sriracha for 3 g, but normally when I use that I mix it with soy sauce and lime as part of a marinade or sauce for more than one serving of food.

I also rarely consume BBQ sauce (I have a few different ones in my refrigerator), and frankly when I have the foods I use them on (pulled pork, other BBQ style foods) it's normally a big cal blowout, so having a few grams of sugar (when I normally don't have other added sugar anyway) seems like it would be a weird thing to worry about.

Temperatures in Boston and throughout New England “smashed” records this weekend, according to the National Weather Service.

Highs in the city were recorded at 70 degrees on Saturday and Sunday, marking the first time Boston has seen back-to-back 70 degree days in January since records began in 1872, and only the third and fourth time temperatures have been so high overall.

We had a record high on Dec 26, at 61, but not the 70s, and not this last week!

This is a good point. A lot of these fear-mongering tactics about condiments assume that you use the same condiments every day and that you use silly amounts of them. We've been talking about 1 TBSP of sriracha for 3 g, but normally when I use that I mix it with soy sauce and lime as part of a marinade or sauce for more than one serving of food.

I also rarely consume BBQ sauce (I have a few different ones in my refrigerator), and frankly when I have the foods I use them on (pulled pork, other BBQ style foods) it's normally a big cal blowout, so having a few grams of sugar (when I normally don't have other added sugar anyway) seems like it would be a weird thing to worry about.

No one is worrying about having a few grams of sugar here and there. As been said numerous times, based on YOUR diet you don't need to quit sugar at all so I'm not quite sure why you are bothering other than trying to sabotage others. And it's pretty obvious you are willfully trying to sabotage others when you suggest to others not to worry about 10 or 20% of your added sugar allotment for the day. The point is to add it all up, not to just disregard what *you* are worried about when based on your diet you shouldn't be here. The woman who budgeted 85 grams for the day is who the sugar challenge is for. Not for you.

A whole can of Campbells tomato soup has 20g of added sugars. A tablespoon of sriracha has 3 grams. A salad dressing might have 6 grams. You've eaten your full allotment of sugar for the day before you've even gotten to dessert.

You are also the same person who has somehow decided that because no one wants a bag of skittles that sugar addiction doesn't exist so your starting point is a bit absurd.

Although I am tracking everything at the moment just for the experiment, this is the conclusion I came to too. For me, non dessert added sugar tends to be pretty small amounts in savory foods or, most commonly, some sauces or rubs, and I really see no reason to care about that. Plus, it would be hard for that to add up to all that many cals. I really think these no sugar challenges that start by assuming you are eating some huge amount of sugar and then tell you to avoid these incidental sources are rather silly. I think it makes more sense to have people track their sugar, understand where it is coming from, and then consider reasonable changes if it is, in fact, higher than expected, which for most will be reducing snack/dessert foods or sugar-added drinks, with some maybe having more than expected in sugary cereals or trail mixes or granola bars or flavored yogurt. But if someone really loves adding, say, a bit of sugar to coffee or oats, I don't think that's something to be bothered about if the overall nutrition of the day and percentage of added sugar is fine anyway.

I used to use an example of a rhubarb sauce with a little sugar added vs. a homemade apple sauce. Why is the latter inherently preferable to the former? No good reason IMO. (Even Dr. Greger, who has other issues, no doubt, says that objecting to a little sugar or oil if that is how the overall diet becomes more sustainable and is able to incorporate nutritious foods like oats and veg, is not something to worry about.)

One of the points of these challenges is educating yourself about how much sugar, especially hidden added sugar, are in your foods. Including savory and sauces.

You don't care about sugar in sauces? You should. For example, one tablespoon of ketchup contains a full teaspoon of sugar (4 grams). A full 1/3rd of the ketchup you eat is sugar. BBQ sauce like Sweet Baby Rays? Two tablespoons of that sauce contains 4 teaspoons (16 grams) of sugar. So 2/3rds of your BBQ sauce is sugar. What about something savory like a Lean Cuisine? The Chicken Ranch Club contains just over 2 teaspoons of sugar (9 grams). Salad dressings average around a 1 1/2 tsp (6 grams) per tablespoon serving. It all starts adding up in a big way, especially when you should be averaging about 25 grams total per day.

The more important issue is why calories derived from sugar are worse for you than calories from fats or protein. Sugars almost convert straight to fat and worse yet, calories from sugar keep you hungry. There is a hormone called leptin that increases as you take in calories. As leptin increases it tells your brain that hey, we're full. We've got enough food/energy right now and we should work on storing and using it. If your brain is not getting a signal from leptin it thinks it's hungry. When you take in sugar it raises your insulin levels and insulin blocks the signal from leptin getting to the brain. Sugar, from natural sources, is usually paired with natural fiber which is why fruits are ok, it's considered a slow carb. The fiber in the fruit slows down how quickly the sugar is metabolized into fat.

Calories in/calories out is only half true, where you get your calories is equally as large an issue.

As noted upthread, the bigger food manufacturers were required to include "added sugar" to their labels beginning Jan 2020, and many of them had already started when I did this challenge last fall. Once exception was Newman's Ranch salad dressing, which has 1 g total sugar per 30 g of dressing. Since I usually eat 15 g salad dressing per salad (I supply the rest of the "mouth feel" with cottage cheese, which has 6 g of intrinsic sugar per 113 g (more than I add to a salad), of which 0 comes from added sugar), while I logged the half gram of sugar, it was not something I was concerned about.

Then why are you here if you don't need to cut sugar out of your diet?

It's similar to the both of you being on a diet when you don't actually need to lose weight then telling others not to worry about logging that slice of cake. Honestly, it's so willfully ignorant it's mind boggling.

"The study also pinpointed, for the first time, this type of processed food as the main source of added sugar in the U.S. diet. "

This is not consistent with the more detailed information I provided. Soda and other sugary drinks, grain-based desserts, dairy-based desserts, and sugary cereals are, of course, processed (even ultraprocessed, since most things are processed in some way).

This does not support the claim that a significant percentage of most people's cals are from sauces and rubs.

Nor is it at all relevant to the conversation we were actually having, which was about people who knew they got only a few grams daily from sauces and rubs and were otherwise avoiding added sugar.

This makes zero sense in the context of telling people not to worry about it:

And this is why I tell people to log and look at sugar.

You continue to take my words out of context. I'm really not sure why.

I'm going to repeat myself for a third time: I think people who are having trouble controlling sugary treats and decide to take a break from sugar in an effort to gain control probably don't have to worry about cutting out sugar in savory items (although if they look at their diaries and also find they are consuming a lot of cals from sugar in those items, sure, I would say you might want to cut down on that -- but not necessarily cut it out). I similarly think people who eat tiny amounts of sugar from some sauces and rubs in the context of an overall healthy and low sugar diet have no reason to worry about it, and I think challenges equating eating 3 g of sugar in savory items to eating half a cake are rather silly. That's why in this challenge we can create our own goals, based on what we think it helpful for ourselve and important for health.

Also no one said this:

"Moreover, it is NOT TRUE that sugar is in everything. It is trivially easy to buy foods that don't have added sugar."

Many people say this, it is usually part of the rationale for those "cut out sugar" challenges that get promoted, especially around this time of year (for example, that one Katie Couric was promoting for a while). That's why I was disagreeing with it. It was actually clear in context in the series of posts you decided to jump into the middle of and take out of context. I was not referring to you, I made the point before you showed up.

Sriracha having 10% of your daily added sugar allowance is absurd.

On a single day, why would that be absurd? It's still way below the 5% limit if that's what one has chosen to apply.

Also, you are assuming the sriracha is all used on a single meal, when it's often not.

Since we are posting or otherwise tracking all the sugar and added sugar we consume, if for some reason it added up to some large amount we would know. When it's something like 1-6 g per day from such items (and nothing else, since we are participating in the challenge or otherwise setting goals for ourselves, why would it matter)? I don't think you have a good answer for this; you certainly have not given one.

In case you are confused, let's recall how this discussion got started -- I said I wasn't worrying about it for me (and kshama said the same), and you concern trolled, suggesting that I probably was too dumb to realize I was getting a bunch in sauces and such, when in fact I am not, and not worrying about it doesn't mean not tracking it.

So IMO, your acting like 3 g of added sugar (12 cal) is something to worry about is what's absurd.

Also, the reason for the WHO limit (10% of cals, 5% is even better) is to make sure that the overall diet is calorie-appropriate and balanced. For example, a half cup of Talenti chocolate peanut butter ice cream has about 24 g of added sugar. There was a time (when I was on a deficit), that I ate something like that approximately every other day (and other sugar maybe 1-3 g from sauces or rubs, again). On the days I didn't consume the ice cream, I'd be way below the 5%, on days I did, barely over, but I also knew that my diet was both calorie-appropriate and nutritionally dense, so it seemed fine to me. Right now I'm choosing to avoid sweets, however, so the numbers are typically way under the 5% every day. I don't think this is necessary for health, but it's a fun goal for me and helps me be motivated to track.

You are looking at grams where I am looking at grams in context of your daily allowance. I am not suggesting 0 sugars, I am saying that it is incredibly easy to rack up 25 grams of added sugar without even thinking about it, especially if you enjoy convenience foods which is why you should track all of it. Again, it all adds up.

Thank you for your concern, but it is misplaced in light of my current diet.

No one said not to track everything -- it's basically impossible to track properly and not track all sugars, after all, and I've never said not to understand how much total added sugar you are getting. We were talking about whether it was necessary to worry about cutting out sriracha (or whatever) for a no added sugar challenge, and in many cases I think that's pointless.

For a comparison, let's say one was limiting sat fat to less than 10% of total cals (let's say my total cals are 1800). The sat fat goal would be 20 g or less. At breakfast, I had 2.4 g of sat fat from peanuts. According to you, that's over 10% of my allotment so I should be worried or something. To make it even worse, at dinner I had 3 g from some beef. Panic! Yet my overall day was 8.6 g, so well within my goal. So does it really matter that I had some foods with more than 10% of the goal? No, because most foods I consume have much less or none. The added sugar analysis is the same.

And you yourself citied the difference between natural sugars processing slower because they are with fiber vs added sugars so not sure why you are backtracking.

I was talking about soda and dessert-type foods.

Natural sugar is not inherently with much fiber -- bananas are a good pre-race food because they don't have a lot of fiber, and sugar can be added to foods with plenty of fiber (that was the point of the home-made rhubarb sauce example, or someone who likes to add a bit of sugar to some steel cut oats and raspberries). Context always matters. With the sriracha, one way I use it is in a homemade dressing for a salad with lots of veg and some source of protein (tofu or meat). So inherently that (and most such sauces and rubs) will be eaten with fiber and nutrient-dense foods in general. That's one important difference -- although of course one should be honest with oneself and know one's own diet.

Further, I have quoted scientific studies to make my assertions and you have quoted a blog.

You did not quote ANYTHING to support most of the claims you made. The only scientific source you quoted said that obese people tend to be leptin resistant, which is not the topic. Nothing said (and nothing credible will say) that having a little added sugar in the context of a balanced overall meal causes weight gain, and absolutely nothing credible supports your claim that one can put on net fat in a deficit due to added sugar.

This is a good point. A lot of these fear-mongering tactics about condiments assume that you use the same condiments every day and that you use silly amounts of them. We've been talking about 1 TBSP of sriracha for 3 g, but normally when I use that I mix it with soy sauce and lime as part of a marinade or sauce for more than one serving of food.

I also rarely consume BBQ sauce (I have a few different ones in my refrigerator), and frankly when I have the foods I use them on (pulled pork, other BBQ style foods) it's normally a big cal blowout, so having a few grams of sugar (when I normally don't have other added sugar anyway) seems like it would be a weird thing to worry about.

No one is worrying about having a few grams of sugar here and there. As been said numerous times, based on YOUR diet you don't need to quit sugar at all so I'm not quite sure why you are bothering other than trying to sabotage others. And it's pretty obvious you are willfully trying to sabotage others when you suggest to others not to worry about 10 or 20% of your added sugar allotment for the day. The point is to add it all up, not to just disregard what *you* are worried about when based on your diet you shouldn't be here. The woman who budgeted 85 grams for the day is who the sugar challenge is for. Not for you.

As I read the post, the 85 g was from MFP (15% of cals). The poster said she got her sugar from dessert type items. You are therefore making up some backstory that does not exist.

More significantly, no one has said not to track all added sugar. That you are making that up and keep repeating it despite that having been clarified over and over is very strange. What was said that people who eat only a tiny amount of added sugar from sauces and such can reasonably determine that there's no value to cutting those out and choosing to focus instead on food items that they get significant amounts of sugar from and may have more difficulty controlling.

You are also the same person who has somehow decided that because no one wants a bag of skittles that sugar addiction doesn't exist so your starting point is a bit absurd.

??? I don't recall talking about skittles, but this is beginning to make it seem like you are here because you are stalking me. Please stick to the topic.

This is a good point. A lot of these fear-mongering tactics about condiments assume that you use the same condiments every day and that you use silly amounts of them. We've been talking about 1 TBSP of sriracha for 3 g, but normally when I use that I mix it with soy sauce and lime as part of a marinade or sauce for more than one serving of food.

I also rarely consume BBQ sauce (I have a few different ones in my refrigerator), and frankly when I have the foods I use them on (pulled pork, other BBQ style foods) it's normally a big cal blowout, so having a few grams of sugar (when I normally don't have other added sugar anyway) seems like it would be a weird thing to worry about.

No one is worrying about having a few grams of sugar here and there. As been said numerous times, based on YOUR diet you don't need to quit sugar at all so I'm not quite sure why you are bothering other than trying to sabotage others. And it's pretty obvious you are willfully trying to sabotage others when you suggest to others not to worry about 10 or 20% of your added sugar allotment for the day. The point is to add it all up, not to just disregard what *you* are worried about when based on your diet you shouldn't be here. The woman who budgeted 85 grams for the day is who the sugar challenge is for. Not for you.

As I read the post, the 85 g was from MFP (15% of cals). The poster said she got her sugar from dessert type items. You are therefore making up some backstory that does not exist.

I went back and looked at the referenced post and prior posts by that poster, and am rather offended on her behalf at how misleadingly you have used the post, @yrguide.

She previously had said she was joining the thread for fun and to learn. She posted several times with added sugar usually around the 5% level (a few slightly higher days due to specific items that she identified and said she was fine with for a single day). The day you have fixated on was clearly an a-typical day, and has zero to do with "hidden sugars" as she said: "It came mostly from 2 pieces of chocolate cake with ice cream. A little from milk in my coffee and bread." The 85 g referenced was MFP's goal for total sugar (15% of cals).

This is a good point. A lot of these fear-mongering tactics about condiments assume that you use the same condiments every day and that you use silly amounts of them. We've been talking about 1 TBSP of sriracha for 3 g, but normally when I use that I mix it with soy sauce and lime as part of a marinade or sauce for more than one serving of food.

I also rarely consume BBQ sauce (I have a few different ones in my refrigerator), and frankly when I have the foods I use them on (pulled pork, other BBQ style foods) it's normally a big cal blowout, so having a few grams of sugar (when I normally don't have other added sugar anyway) seems like it would be a weird thing to worry about.

No one is worrying about having a few grams of sugar here and there. As been said numerous times, based on YOUR diet you don't need to quit sugar at all so I'm not quite sure why you are bothering other than trying to sabotage others. And it's pretty obvious you are willfully trying to sabotage others when you suggest to others not to worry about 10 or 20% of your added sugar allotment for the day. The point is to add it all up, not to just disregard what *you* are worried about when based on your diet you shouldn't be here. The woman who budgeted 85 grams for the day is who the sugar challenge is for. Not for you.

A whole can of Campbells tomato soup has 20g of added sugars. A tablespoon of sriracha has 3 grams. A salad dressing might have 6 grams. You've eaten your full allotment of sugar for the day before you've even gotten to dessert.

You are also the same person who has somehow decided that because no one wants a bag of skittles that sugar addiction doesn't exist so your starting point is a bit absurd.

Again, you shouldn't be here.

I find it bizarre that you are repeatedly telling the person who started the thread that she should not be here.

I went back through the whole thread and the only one who mentioned Skittles here was you. Instead of stalking someone, why not put them on Ignore? You seem to be triggered by her posts. I can't tell if you are accidentally misreading them, or deliberately in order to start a fight. Either way, it's not going to help you.

Although I am tracking everything at the moment just for the experiment, this is the conclusion I came to too. For me, non dessert added sugar tends to be pretty small amounts in savory foods or, most commonly, some sauces or rubs, and I really see no reason to care about that. Plus, it would be hard for that to add up to all that many cals. I really think these no sugar challenges that start by assuming you are eating some huge amount of sugar and then tell you to avoid these incidental sources are rather silly. I think it makes more sense to have people track their sugar, understand where it is coming from, and then consider reasonable changes if it is, in fact, higher than expected, which for most will be reducing snack/dessert foods or sugar-added drinks, with some maybe having more than expected in sugary cereals or trail mixes or granola bars or flavored yogurt. But if someone really loves adding, say, a bit of sugar to coffee or oats, I don't think that's something to be bothered about if the overall nutrition of the day and percentage of added sugar is fine anyway.

I used to use an example of a rhubarb sauce with a little sugar added vs. a homemade apple sauce. Why is the latter inherently preferable to the former? No good reason IMO. (Even Dr. Greger, who has other issues, no doubt, says that objecting to a little sugar or oil if that is how the overall diet becomes more sustainable and is able to incorporate nutritious foods like oats and veg, is not something to worry about.)

One of the points of these challenges is educating yourself about how much sugar, especially hidden added sugar, are in your foods. Including savory and sauces.

You don't care about sugar in sauces? You should. For example, one tablespoon of ketchup contains a full teaspoon of sugar (4 grams). A full 1/3rd of the ketchup you eat is sugar. BBQ sauce like Sweet Baby Rays? Two tablespoons of that sauce contains 4 teaspoons (16 grams) of sugar. So 2/3rds of your BBQ sauce is sugar. What about something savory like a Lean Cuisine? The Chicken Ranch Club contains just over 2 teaspoons of sugar (9 grams). Salad dressings average around a 1 1/2 tsp (6 grams) per tablespoon serving. It all starts adding up in a big way, especially when you should be averaging about 25 grams total per day.

The more important issue is why calories derived from sugar are worse for you than calories from fats or protein. Sugars almost convert straight to fat and worse yet, calories from sugar keep you hungry. There is a hormone called leptin that increases as you take in calories. As leptin increases it tells your brain that hey, we're full. We've got enough food/energy right now and we should work on storing and using it. If your brain is not getting a signal from leptin it thinks it's hungry. When you take in sugar it raises your insulin levels and insulin blocks the signal from leptin getting to the brain. Sugar, from natural sources, is usually paired with natural fiber which is why fruits are ok, it's considered a slow carb. The fiber in the fruit slows down how quickly the sugar is metabolized into fat.

Calories in/calories out is only half true, where you get your calories is equally as large an issue.

As noted upthread, the bigger food manufacturers were required to include "added sugar" to their labels beginning Jan 2020, and many of them had already started when I did this challenge last fall. Once exception was Newman's Ranch salad dressing, which has 1 g total sugar per 30 g of dressing. Since I usually eat 15 g salad dressing per salad (I supply the rest of the "mouth feel" with cottage cheese, which has 6 g of intrinsic sugar per 113 g (more than I add to a salad), of which 0 comes from added sugar), while I logged the half gram of sugar, it was not something I was concerned about.

Then why are you here if you don't need to cut sugar out of your diet?

It's similar to the both of you being on a diet when you don't actually need to lose weight then telling others not to worry about logging that slice of cake. Honestly, it's so willfully ignorant it's mind boggling.

You're clearly intelligent, so I think the only explanation for you equating not worrying about sugar in Sriracha and salad dressing = not worried about all added sugar is that you are being deliberating obtuse, especially given that you replied to both my Halloween candy post and my pear post:

I joined this challenge to see what I can learn from it. And what I learned was that the added sugar in foods like Sriracha, my lightly sweetened tea, and protein powder, was not a problem for me. My issue, especially this time of year, is baked goods, and that is because of the high calories, which are also coming from flour and fat, not just sugar.

My mom sees a pear and sees a pear.

I see a pear and see pear pecan muffins. I've just increased those pear calories from 157 cal in a 258 g D'Anjou pear to 256 calories per muffin x 12 = 3,072 calories. That is way more relevant to me than sugar in Sriracha.

Although I am tracking everything at the moment just for the experiment, this is the conclusion I came to too. For me, non dessert added sugar tends to be pretty small amounts in savory foods or, most commonly, some sauces or rubs, and I really see no reason to care about that. Plus, it would be hard for that to add up to all that many cals. I really think these no sugar challenges that start by assuming you are eating some huge amount of sugar and then tell you to avoid these incidental sources are rather silly. I think it makes more sense to have people track their sugar, understand where it is coming from, and then consider reasonable changes if it is, in fact, higher than expected, which for most will be reducing snack/dessert foods or sugar-added drinks, with some maybe having more than expected in sugary cereals or trail mixes or granola bars or flavored yogurt. But if someone really loves adding, say, a bit of sugar to coffee or oats, I don't think that's something to be bothered about if the overall nutrition of the day and percentage of added sugar is fine anyway.

I used to use an example of a rhubarb sauce with a little sugar added vs. a homemade apple sauce. Why is the latter inherently preferable to the former? No good reason IMO. (Even Dr. Greger, who has other issues, no doubt, says that objecting to a little sugar or oil if that is how the overall diet becomes more sustainable and is able to incorporate nutritious foods like oats and veg, is not something to worry about.)

One of the points of these challenges is educating yourself about how much sugar, especially hidden added sugar, are in your foods. Including savory and sauces.

You don't care about sugar in sauces? You should. For example, one tablespoon of ketchup contains a full teaspoon of sugar (4 grams). A full 1/3rd of the ketchup you eat is sugar. BBQ sauce like Sweet Baby Rays? Two tablespoons of that sauce contains 4 teaspoons (16 grams) of sugar. So 2/3rds of your BBQ sauce is sugar. What about something savory like a Lean Cuisine? The Chicken Ranch Club contains just over 2 teaspoons of sugar (9 grams). Salad dressings average around a 1 1/2 tsp (6 grams) per tablespoon serving. It all starts adding up in a big way, especially when you should be averaging about 25 grams total per day.

The more important issue is why calories derived from sugar are worse for you than calories from fats or protein. Sugars almost convert straight to fat and worse yet, calories from sugar keep you hungry. There is a hormone called leptin that increases as you take in calories. As leptin increases it tells your brain that hey, we're full. We've got enough food/energy right now and we should work on storing and using it. If your brain is not getting a signal from leptin it thinks it's hungry. When you take in sugar it raises your insulin levels and insulin blocks the signal from leptin getting to the brain. Sugar, from natural sources, is usually paired with natural fiber which is why fruits are ok, it's considered a slow carb. The fiber in the fruit slows down how quickly the sugar is metabolized into fat.

Calories in/calories out is only half true, where you get your calories is equally as large an issue.

As noted upthread, the bigger food manufacturers were required to include "added sugar" to their labels beginning Jan 2020, and many of them had already started when I did this challenge last fall. Once exception was Newman's Ranch salad dressing, which has 1 g total sugar per 30 g of dressing. Since I usually eat 15 g salad dressing per salad (I supply the rest of the "mouth feel" with cottage cheese, which has 6 g of intrinsic sugar per 113 g (more than I add to a salad), of which 0 comes from added sugar), while I logged the half gram of sugar, it was not something I was concerned about.

Then why are you here if you don't need to cut sugar out of your diet?

It's similar to the both of you being on a diet when you don't actually need to lose weight then telling others not to worry about logging that slice of cake. Honestly, it's so willfully ignorant it's mind boggling.

You're clearly intelligent, so I think the only explanation for you equating not worrying about sugar in Sriracha and salad dressing = not worried about all added sugar is that you are being deliberating obtuse, especially given that you replied to both my Halloween candy post and my pear post:

I joined this challenge to see what I can learn from it. And what I learned was that the added sugar in foods like Sriracha, my lightly sweetened tea, and protein powder, was not a problem for me. My issue, especially this time of year, is baked goods, and that is because of the high calories, which are also coming from flour and fat, not just sugar.

My mom sees a pear and sees a pear.

I see a pear and see pear pecan muffins. I've just increased those pear calories from 157 cal in a 258 g D'Anjou pear to 256 calories per muffin x 12 = 3,072 calories. That is way more relevant to me than sugar in Sriracha.

You are the one who said you weren't concerned about sugar from sources except for baked goods. You were worried about the urge to covert pears to baked goods which includes all sorts of triggers. Someone is being obtuse here and it's not me.

This is a good point. A lot of these fear-mongering tactics about condiments assume that you use the same condiments every day and that you use silly amounts of them. We've been talking about 1 TBSP of sriracha for 3 g, but normally when I use that I mix it with soy sauce and lime as part of a marinade or sauce for more than one serving of food.

I also rarely consume BBQ sauce (I have a few different ones in my refrigerator), and frankly when I have the foods I use them on (pulled pork, other BBQ style foods) it's normally a big cal blowout, so having a few grams of sugar (when I normally don't have other added sugar anyway) seems like it would be a weird thing to worry about.

No one is worrying about having a few grams of sugar here and there. As been said numerous times, based on YOUR diet you don't need to quit sugar at all so I'm not quite sure why you are bothering other than trying to sabotage others. And it's pretty obvious you are willfully trying to sabotage others when you suggest to others not to worry about 10 or 20% of your added sugar allotment for the day. The point is to add it all up, not to just disregard what *you* are worried about when based on your diet you shouldn't be here. The woman who budgeted 85 grams for the day is who the sugar challenge is for. Not for you.

A whole can of Campbells tomato soup has 20g of added sugars. A tablespoon of sriracha has 3 grams. A salad dressing might have 6 grams. You've eaten your full allotment of sugar for the day before you've even gotten to dessert.

You are also the same person who has somehow decided that because no one wants a bag of skittles that sugar addiction doesn't exist so your starting point is a bit absurd.

Again, you shouldn't be here.

I find it bizarre that you are repeatedly telling the person who started the thread that she should not be here.

I went back through the whole thread and the only one who mentioned Skittles here was you. Instead of stalking someone, why not put them on Ignore? You seem to be triggered by her posts. I can't tell if you are accidentally misreading them, or deliberately in order to start a fight. Either way, it's not going to help you.

You are referring to the wrong post. I came here, I searched sugar. I found this thread and noticed the poster making the poor assessment was the same one as the OP.

This is a good point. A lot of these fear-mongering tactics about condiments assume that you use the same condiments every day and that you use silly amounts of them. We've been talking about 1 TBSP of sriracha for 3 g, but normally when I use that I mix it with soy sauce and lime as part of a marinade or sauce for more than one serving of food.

I also rarely consume BBQ sauce (I have a few different ones in my refrigerator), and frankly when I have the foods I use them on (pulled pork, other BBQ style foods) it's normally a big cal blowout, so having a few grams of sugar (when I normally don't have other added sugar anyway) seems like it would be a weird thing to worry about.

No one is worrying about having a few grams of sugar here and there. As been said numerous times, based on YOUR diet you don't need to quit sugar at all so I'm not quite sure why you are bothering other than trying to sabotage others. And it's pretty obvious you are willfully trying to sabotage others when you suggest to others not to worry about 10 or 20% of your added sugar allotment for the day. The point is to add it all up, not to just disregard what *you* are worried about when based on your diet you shouldn't be here. The woman who budgeted 85 grams for the day is who the sugar challenge is for. Not for you.

As I read the post, the 85 g was from MFP (15% of cals). The poster said she got her sugar from dessert type items. You are therefore making up some backstory that does not exist.

I went back and looked at the referenced post and prior posts by that poster, and am rather offended on her behalf at how misleadingly you have used the post, @yrguide.

She previously had said she was joining the thread for fun and to learn. She posted several times with added sugar usually around the 5% level (a few slightly higher days due to specific items that she identified and said she was fine with for a single day). The day you have fixated on was clearly an a-typical day, and has zero to do with "hidden sugars" as she said: "It came mostly from 2 pieces of chocolate cake with ice cream. A little from milk in my coffee and bread." The 85 g referenced was MFP's goal for total sugar (15% of cals).

Why would you possibly be offended on her behalf? It wasn't offensive at all.

It was two days in a row, not one. The day before the 85 gram day was 83 grams.

This is not consistent with the more detailed information I provided. Soda and other sugary drinks, grain-based desserts, dairy-based desserts, and sugary cereals are, of course, processed (even ultraprocessed, since most things are processed in some way).

And your information is not consistent with the information I provided. I made the claim the the bulk of added sugars come from processed foods and that still stands.

Also, you are assuming the sriracha is all used on a single meal, when it's often not.

It's a tablespoon of sriracha, are you doling it out over 5 or 6 meals?

So IMO, your acting like 3 g of added sugar (12 cal) is something to worry about is what's absurd.

The willful ignorance here is absurd. If you were in a CICO weight loss thread and you told people over and over again not to worry about tracking that 120 calorie candy bar, it's negligent in the scope of your weight loss goals because it's only 10% of your allowed calories of the day. And then you said eh, anything around 100 calories you shouldn't bother to track the entire forum would be all over you.

That is what YOU are suggesting here. Simply because it's two, or three, or four, or five grams to you it's not a big deal when in reality in the scope of the WHO guidelines for intake for added sugars it's 10% or 20% of your daily allowance.

You'd be crucified in the CICO boards for suggesting anything like that yet you guys are flippantly doing it here.

Again, based on your diets you don't need to quit or track added sugars so while your advice is pertinent to only you don't sabotage others who need to learn about how sugar quickly adds up over the course of a day. Even suggesting ah it's impossible to track added sugars is an absurd assertion. If a majority of added sugars in an individuals diet come from processed foods all of them are required to be included in the product's nutritional information.

Blowing off a few grams here or there add up in the same way calories do and the suggestion to blow it off undermines people who need to sit down and really track all of their sources of added sugars.

This is a good point. A lot of these fear-mongering tactics about condiments assume that you use the same condiments every day and that you use silly amounts of them. We've been talking about 1 TBSP of sriracha for 3 g, but normally when I use that I mix it with soy sauce and lime as part of a marinade or sauce for more than one serving of food.

I also rarely consume BBQ sauce (I have a few different ones in my refrigerator), and frankly when I have the foods I use them on (pulled pork, other BBQ style foods) it's normally a big cal blowout, so having a few grams of sugar (when I normally don't have other added sugar anyway) seems like it would be a weird thing to worry about.

No one is worrying about having a few grams of sugar here and there. As been said numerous times, based on YOUR diet you don't need to quit sugar at all so I'm not quite sure why you are bothering other than trying to sabotage others. And it's pretty obvious you are willfully trying to sabotage others when you suggest to others not to worry about 10 or 20% of your added sugar allotment for the day. The point is to add it all up, not to just disregard what *you* are worried about when based on your diet you shouldn't be here. The woman who budgeted 85 grams for the day is who the sugar challenge is for. Not for you.

As I read the post, the 85 g was from MFP (15% of cals). The poster said she got her sugar from dessert type items. You are therefore making up some backstory that does not exist.

I went back and looked at the referenced post and prior posts by that poster, and am rather offended on her behalf at how misleadingly you have used the post, @yrguide.

She previously had said she was joining the thread for fun and to learn. She posted several times with added sugar usually around the 5% level (a few slightly higher days due to specific items that she identified and said she was fine with for a single day). The day you have fixated on was clearly an a-typical day, and has zero to do with "hidden sugars" as she said: "It came mostly from 2 pieces of chocolate cake with ice cream. A little from milk in my coffee and bread." The 85 g referenced was MFP's goal for total sugar (15% of cals).

Why would you possibly be offended on her behalf? It wasn't offensive at all.

You suggested that she was habitually eating huge amounts of added sugar and wasn't aware of where it was coming from. That's offensive because it's a misrepresentation of the truth.

It was two days in a row, not one. The day before the 85 gram day was 83 grams.

Nope, there were no 85 g days. I went quickly through the relevant posts, and here are the reported days:

15, about 12, 29, 52 (caramel apple as a Halloween tradition and dressing she knew was sweet), 17 (even including small piece of cake), 28 (yogurt, she said she knew but considered it a better choice than a candy bar, and was fine with it), 18, 20, 18, 83 (the 2 big pieces of cake with ice cream), 35 total, 18 (added again).

At this point, this whole thing is super stupid, as I don't even know what you imagine we are debating. (I also think your interpretation of my post in the other thread is bizarre, but we aren't supposed to bring things in from another thread so I'm going to ignore that. Comment on my post in the relevant thread if you like.)

In an effort to find a way to end this and to get back to the purpose of the thread:

One thing I think we actually agree on: for the purposes of this thread and challenge it makes sense to track and log (or just know for your own purposes) all added sugar, since it is helpful to understand where your sugar is coming from, especially if you are new to tracking.

One thing I think we might disagree on: Whether you care about cutting out or down on sugar from particular sources is dependent on why you think it's worth paying attention to and cutting out or down on sugar in the first place. If the issue is trouble controlling sweets and you don't get all that much from savory-type sources, you might not care about cutting out or otherwise worrying about savory sources (and might be more interested in talking about temptations re sweets rather than grams of sugar, added or otherwise). This thread is meant to be open to everyone interested in cutting down on added sugar, including those who want to try the absolutely none experience and those who merely want support in learning to control the intake of sweets, and those who are curious about what they are consuming and easy ways to cut back. My comments were not about what others should do (see next paragraph).

Another thing I think we disagree about (since it's apparently what caused you to go ballistic on me): if one has already tracked one's diet or regularly does and already knows that she gets little added sugar on a daily basis from tiny amounts of sugar in a few products such as protein powder, sauces, or rubs, or even a favorite salad dressing, etc., there is no particular health benefit and may be no other benefits to cutting out such foods. I think it's cool if one wants to (I did it once, after all), but I think it's wrong to claim that such a challenge requires cutting out all added sugar to be valuable or that it's unhealthy to eat any (which again was the point of the post you took issue with).

Again, I have found it valuable for me, from time to time, to cut out added sugar, as it can help me get more quickly out of bad habits I sometimes establish around the holidays or in times of stress (the past month was both). The first time, mainly because I was told it was oh so hard, I cut out ALL added sugar and found it not hard at all. Every time after that, I've focused only on dessert/snack type items, since that's what specifically related to my own reasons for doing this. Thus, I think it's quite reasonable to not worry about products that have a tiny bit of sugar unless you have other reasons (such as getting a high amount of added sugar in your day as a whole) to worry about it, as I said. Publicly-sponsored challenges (not personal ones) resting on the claim that even a couple of grams of sugar total are something to worry about, if the sugar is added, fail to understand why there are recommended limits on added sugar and nutrition in general.